9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 975X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prehension of the witnesses being tampered with. Taking into account the totality of facts and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case ofSTATE OF RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR VERSUS BALCHAND @ BALIAY [ 1977 (9) TMI 126 - SUPREME COURT] , GUDIKANTI NARASIMHULU AND ORS. VERSUS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [ 1977 (12) TMI 143 - SUPREME COURT] , RAM GOVIND UPADHYAY VERSUS SUDARSHAN SINGH AND ORS. [ 2002 (3) TMI 945 - SUPREME COURT] , PRASANTA KUMAR SARKAR VERSUS ASHIS CHATTERJEE AND ORS. [ 2010 (10) TMI 1199 - SUPREME COURT] and MAHIPAL VERSUS RAJESH KUMAR @ POLIA ANR. [ 2019 (12) TMI 1461 - SUPREME COURT] , the larger interest of the public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ences as alleged are punishable up-to 5 years imprisonment. It is further submitted that no notice for recovery of G.S.T. has been issued against the applicant and he is illegally arrested. It is further submitted that till date penalty or taxes has not been ascertained as per Act. It is further submitted that the offences are compoundable in nature and triable by Magistrate. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.05.2023. In support of his submission, he relied upon the judgment of Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation Another, (2021) 10 SCC 773. It is further submitted that applicant has no previous criminal history and if the applicant is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors., v. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh Ors., (2002) 3 SCC 598, Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee Anr., (2010) 14 SCC 496 and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar Anr., (2020) 2 SCC 118 , the larger interest of the public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed. Let applicant, Deepak Kumar , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orts/endeavor and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the applicant, if there is no other legal impediment. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
